"Why is it okay for consumers to pay less than half for a used game but still have access to everything that people who pay $60 have? "

Why is it okay for consumers to pay less than half for a used car but still have access to everything that people who pay $20k+ have?

Sorry, CynicalVision, one cannot be so flippant when considering the repercussions that services and restrictions like these have on the entire concept of ownership.

Well both iTunes and Valves Steam is free - so, do I think free access to online markets is dead... that's a big fat NO.

@jaosobno
PSN will remain free. The basic services will not change. Sony may put the focus now on Plus with any new services but the core ability to play online will continue to be free on the Playstation 3. Sony will toy with the idea of keeping that core experience free on the Playstation 4 so it will be interesting if it remains free. Right now there is a shift happening testing the market with things like the Elite service for Call of Duty, online passes and other revenue based services like Plus.

@Eromu
Bad analogy. A car depreciates over time and costs money to keep up the maintenance. So in my view it is only right for those hosting the online services to be funded some way and buying used means no money is going to the publishers who run the matchmaking services and everything else needed to host the games online.

Here's the problem with ownership of software. Quite simply, you don't. You own a licence to use the software, which the publisher can revoke at any time (in fact if your account is blocked on PSN, XBox Live or Steam you lose access to any downloaded content and the only reason this wouldn't hold true for a disc is because it's physical, doesn't mean they can't block access to portions of it though).

I, honestly, have no real issue with it, because I only buy games new HOWEVER and this is the big problem, this needs to extend to cover more than one system and user account because I have no doubt there's people with multiple PS3s and PS3 users in the same household it should be like PSN content, ability to activate on 5 systems, covers all users on that system.

@CynicalVision: Why should developers get paid twice for the same game they already got paid for?

They sell all their copies to a retailer, thus get paid for each and every copy. Why then should they get paid again because someone decides to return a copy that the RETAILER paid for (and sold to the consumer) and decides to resell? The developer relinquishes their right to additional profit once they sell the physical copy to the retailer. It would be different if their game was DL only but that isn't the case.

If I sell someone a tv, I don't have the right to demand that they give me the full value cost of the tv if they decide to then sell it to someone else.

the basis of PSN is free online play which the 360 doesn't have! online pass and such has nothing to do with free PSN. it's just a way devs recouping profit from 2nd hand markets. what Sony is and will be doing for PS+ is totally up to them as they have to keep they paying gamers happy by adding more stuff to the service. but as long as the online play stays free, why complaint? want more services? pay for PS+, end of story!

@CynicalVision

Technically Retailers bought the games. We are not buying games directly from them (Devs) unless of course it's their own shop.

And are you guys forgetting something? This isn't just for online. RAGE will be having an online pass for single player content. So the matter for running matchmaking and such isn't even a reason why they do it.

I understand developers want more money, but if they are going to start charging for Online then at least do this. Offer a trail before you make anyone purchase the dam thing. Like what Homefront does where you can only reach a certain level and then you can't progress anymore. If they are going to offer and online pass then give me a reason to buy it instead of having me go in blind without knowing whether I want the online or not.

Also why should they be charging for the game online? As much as I like dislike COD for being the same at least they aren't making you pay online. Why? Because the support is there. You know whats even worse? the fact that most developers today has paid DLC on launch day of games. If I am going to pay for Online pass at least have the game packed with all this content cause DLC isn't a thing they make in a day and in most cases is thought up before the game is even released.

They are a great idea. Gamestop and used sales are to blame. Devs and Publishers now get a piece of used games sales.

if 360 still has online passes........thats just reaaaaaaally bad.

in regards to online passes i believe that the online pass should register to your serial number on the ps3, not just the username, but at the same time should register to your username aswell incase you have another ps3.

its the most logical and fair thing to do

fear mongering at it's worst.

EA, THQ, Disney Interactive, Sony and Ubisoft are the publishers that i know of that implement the online pass. Ubisoft being the latest about a month or so ago

You're not understanding something here. Used game sales DO NOT impact online because there is NOT an additional user, it is merely a transference. If I traded my game in to gamestop, they have my copy. They then sell that copy to another person. I can't use that copy anymore, but someone is in my place. This has no burden on the online infrastructure as no additional member has been added, and the developer has already been paid for the game with their original sale to gamestop.

This is purely based on greed. Developers want to be paid more than once for one copy of a game. Used game sales in no way hurt them in any arena. Not additional users, not loss of revenue, nothing.

Well said, Dragon Knight. Bubbles up.

I've been trying to explain that to people since I joined this site; they just can't seem to wrap their heads around it, though. They want to believe it hurts developers, but what it REALLY does it hurt ownership rights: no matter what you paid, you only own HALF the game until you pay the developers. Even though they've already been paid for the copy of the game you own- including the half they won't let you play- you have to pay them again to play the whole thing. And at any time, they can choose to no longer support that game, thus meaning your payment grants you nothing.